Latest revision as of 07:48, May 25, 2011

Is this pointless?

“The Pointless Paradox is the total antinomy of epistemologic subsidiarity. It annihilates all intuition on patalogics. It is to be feared to disqualify the philosophical tradition what rewards the babble of pointless hodgepodges with a cathedra on the Faculty of Arts ...”

As with almost all paradoxes (paradoxen?) the Pointless Paradox is an apparently true statement or group of statements that leads to a contradiction or a situation which defies intuition or logic. In the case of the Pointless Paradox this is doubly so, making this a paradox within a paradox. Why I'm wasting my time telling you this I just don't know, nor do I care. See Nobody cares for more information.

Some of the greatest minds in history, from Immanuel Kant to Bertrand Russell have attempted to resolve this paradox with no success. Indeed, Russell referred to it as "the motherbitch of all paradoxes".

The debate as to whether or not the paradox did or did not have a point and if or if not the discussion was pointless has raged for centuries. Generally speaking opinions can be polarised into one of two distinct positions:

Position 1: Those who consider the entire issue to be "complete bollocks" and attempt to avoid the discussion whenever possible.

Position 2: Those too stupid to take the above position.

Most would agree that a picture of a wildebeest in this context is rather pointless. Others would argue that it now has a point, in illustrating pointlessness.

Getting more details from supporters of position 1 has been extremely problematic as they are notoriously tight lipped regarding their views. When extensively pressed these people generally resort to a combination of expletive profanity and/or simply repeating what they have already said albeit in a slightly different form. This has been noted by some position 2 followers who claim that this "blatant attempt to avoid the question" is clear evidence that they know far more than they are letting on.

People who hold position 2 are far more willing to discuss matters and so far more is known about this position. Followers of position 2 can be sub-categorised into the following:

People who believe that only followers of position 1 know the answer, and that there is no point discussing the issues aside from asking followers of position 1.

Those who believe that a pointless paradox could never talk and so the paradox in the discussion must be an impostor. If this is so it is entirely possible that the pointless paradox was correct. Well the impostor pointless paradox anyway.

Those who believe that the Pointless Paradox is a symbolic discussion which represents the ultimate debate of mankind regarding the existence or not of God. In a subtle and witty response to the ideological viewpoints of both creationism based organised religion and modern atheism groups such as the Flying Spaghetti Monster movement the pointless paradox cleverly illustrates how futile and inadequate both positions are.

Those who have thought about the above for some time and are starting to consider taking up the views of position 1. These people may be sub-categorised into the following:

Those who decide that the entire issue is "complete bollocks" and take up the views of position 1.

Those not fortunate enough to take the above position. These people may be sub-categorised into the following:

Those who decide that the entire issue is "complete bollocks" and take up the views of position 1.

There is generally agreement amongst those willing to continue the debate that the existence or not of the pointless paradox is all man's fault for trying to be such a smart ass and that "had he just kept his big mouth shut none of this would have happened".

Most experts agree that they "couldn't give a shit" about the whole thing, but supporters of the pointless paradox claim that this is just more evidence that the pointless paradox has been right all along...